[linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Glenn Shannon]

I was wondering if anyone else out there is using XFS with LVM?

Glenn

RE: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Steve Wray]

Yup.
On top of LVM.
So I have to have my LFM system as a root volume. 
Tricky stuff. The LFS system has no choice but to
come up fron an initial ramdrive.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> Behalf Of Glenn Shannon
> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 11:20 PM
> To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> Subject: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM
> 
> 
> I was wondering if anyone else out there is using XFS with LVM?
> 
> Glenn
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> 
> 

RE: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Steve Wray]

Never try to answer an email while struggling with a messy
jam sandwich.

What I was trying to say is yes I use XFM on LVM based
system, no worries. But what is a worry is having a multi-boot
linux box with Linux From Scratch and Redhat with 2 different root
partitions...


> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> Behalf Of Glenn Shannon
> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 11:20 PM
> To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> Subject: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM
> 
> 
> I was wondering if anyone else out there is using XFS with LVM?
> 
> Glenn
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> 
> 

Re: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Alvaro Garcia Barcena]

	I was wondering if anyone else out there is using XFS with LVM?

Yup. Now what? ;)

Regards, Alvaro

Re: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Glenn Shannon]

Alvaro Garcia Barcena wrote:

> 	I was wondering if anyone else out there is using XFS with LVM?
> 
> Yup. Now what? ;)
> 
> Regards, Alvaro
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> 
> 
Just looking mainly for tips/tricks/possible headaches.... got any? :)

Glenn

RE: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Steve Wray]

Oh yeah heres one to do with xfs;
you can't shrink them so watch out.

Mind you, reiserfs is supposed to be shrinkable but,
ahem, it didn't work...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> Behalf Of Glenn Shannon
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 12:22 AM
> To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM
> 
> 
> Alvaro Garcia Barcena wrote:
> 
> > 	I was wondering if anyone else out there is using XFS with LVM?
> > 
> > Yup. Now what? ;)
> > 
> > Regards, Alvaro
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-lvm mailing list
> > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > 
> > 
> Just looking mainly for tips/tricks/possible headaches.... got any? :)
> 
> Glenn
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> 

Re: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Terje Kvernes]

"Steve Wray" <steve.wray@the.net.nz> writes:

> Mind you, reiserfs is supposed to be shrinkable but, ahem, it didn't
> work...
  
  ouch. what happened?

-- 
Terje

RE: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Steve Wray]

> From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> 
> "Steve Wray" <steve.wray@the.net.nz> writes:
> 
> > Mind you, reiserfs is supposed to be shrinkable but, ahem, it didn't
> > work...
>   
>   ouch. what happened?

It wouldn't mount afterward... It was only on /usr/local
whuch was backed up.

Re: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Ragnar Kjørstad]

On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 10:50:27AM +1200, Steve Wray wrote:
> > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> > 
> > "Steve Wray" <steve.wray@the.net.nz> writes:
> > 
> > > Mind you, reiserfs is supposed to be shrinkable but, ahem, it didn't
> > > work...
> >   
> >   ouch. what happened?
> 
> It wouldn't mount afterward... It was only on /usr/local
> whuch was backed up.

Did you report it to reiserfs-list@namesys.com?


-- 
Ragnar Kj�rstad
Big Storage

RE: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Steve Wray]

> From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> Behalf Of Ragnar Kj�rstad
> On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 10:50:27AM +1200, Steve Wray wrote:
> > > > Mind you, reiserfs is supposed to be shrinkable but, ahem, it didn't
> > > > work...
> > >
> > >   ouch. what happened?
> >
> > It wouldn't mount afterward... It was only on /usr/local
> > whuch was backed up.
>
> Did you report it to reiserfs-list@namesys.com?

nooo, I'm not really using reiserfs in a serious way.
I only tried it out because XFS isn't shrinkable,
so I wondered how reiserfs would perform on a shrink.

I'm going to try ext3 sometime soon...

Re: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Harald Milz]

In article <20010523010640.C2933@vestdata.no>, Ragnar Kjørstad <lvm@ragnark.vestdata.no> wrote:
>> 
>> It wouldn't mount afterward... It was only on /usr/local
>> whuch was backed up.

> Did you report it to reiserfs-list@namesys.com?

That doesn't always help. I once had a ~1 meg file in the reiserfs root
filesystem which wouldn't delete but I laways got a nice oops. I reported
it to Hans and got a reply that someone would look at it bit that never
actually happened (at least got no feedback).

But that was just once. I still have everything on reiserfs on LVM on my
machines, and just started to experiment with XFS. The fact that it is not
shrinkable is a bit annoying though. Like AIX JFS. ... 

-- 
Harald Milz           |     hm@linux-magazin.de     | If one studies too
Linux Magazin         | phone  +49 (0) 89 993411-20 | zealously, one easily
Stefan-George-Ring 24 | fax    +49 (0) 89 993411-99 | loses his pants. --
D-81929 Muenchen      | http://www.linux-magazin.de | A. Einstein.

Re: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Steve Lord]

> But that was just once. I still have everything on reiserfs on LVM on my
> machines, and just started to experiment with XFS. The fact that it is not
> shrinkable is a bit annoying though. Like AIX JFS. ...
> 
> --
> Harald Milz           |     hm@linux-magazin.de     | If one studies too

Growing is a fairly simple operation for filesystems, shrinking complexity
is a function of metadata complexity, and XFS metadata is very complex,
the exception to this is the case of filesystems designed with shrinking
in mind, but they will almost certainly have to make compromises to support
this.

Shrinking is also a less used operation in production situations than growing,
it might be fun to play with, but the type of system XFS comes from you would
tend to just buy more disks than move one out of an existing filesystem.
The only really useful 'shrink' operation in this scenario is remove a
failing drive, and given the volume managers which usually sit under XFS
the only thing capable of doing this is mirroring the drive (or using
hardware raid).

Oh, and online shrinking would be the preferable implementation in a
production situation, which means doing it with transactions.

So these are the reasons XFS does not have a shrink capability. As a
technical option it is possible to implement this, but the code would
be very complex and we have a lot of other things to do which have a
higher priority. As I have said before, if someone wants to try it
I would be happy to offer suggestions.

Steve

Re: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Harald Milz]

In article <200105231113.f4NBDLA21032@jen.americas.sgi.com>, Steve Lord <lord@sgi.com> wrote:

> Shrinking is also a less used operation in production situations than growing,

This what IBM marketing as well always told me (when I was an IBMer) but it
turned out over time that I don't always buy a new disk when I need more
space, but try to clean up some leftovers and resize my partitioning. Then
it's nice if you can shrink. I mean you can always backup a filesystem,
delete it, create it smaller, and restore the backup. But that is
cumbersome and requires more scheduled downtime than desirable. 

Does SGI have plans to eventually implement shrinking, or am I left with
the every so often heard marketing statement that I sure don't need it? 

(SCNR)

-- 
Harald Milz           |     hm@linux-magazin.de     | "Our vision is to speed
Linux Magazin         | phone  +49 (0) 89 993411-20 | up time, eventually
Stefan-George-Ring 24 | fax    +49 (0) 89 993411-99 | eliminating it." --
D-81929 Muenchen      | http://www.linux-magazin.de | Alex Schure

Re: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Andreas Dilger]

Steve Wray writes:
> nooo, I'm not really using reiserfs in a serious way.
> I only tried it out because XFS isn't shrinkable,
> so I wondered how reiserfs would perform on a shrink.
> 
> I'm going to try ext3 sometime soon...

Just FYI, I have patches/tools to do online and offline resizing of ext2,
and have an alpha online ext3 resizer.  The ext2 code is pretty solid.
You can grow an ext2 filesystem online, but you need to unmount it to
shrink the filesystem.

Cheers, Andreas
-- 
Andreas Dilger  \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
                 \  would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/               -- Dogbert

Re: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM

[Steve Lord]

> In article <200105231113.f4NBDLA21032@jen.americas.sgi.com>, Steve Lord <lord
> @sgi.com> wrote:
> 
> > Shrinking is also a less used operation in production situations than growi
> ng,
> 
> This what IBM marketing as well always told me (when I was an IBMer) but it
> turned out over time that I don't always buy a new disk when I need more
> space, but try to clean up some leftovers and resize my partitioning. Then
> it's nice if you can shrink. I mean you can always backup a filesystem,
> delete it, create it smaller, and restore the backup. But that is
> cumbersome and requires more scheduled downtime than desirable. 
> 
> Does SGI have plans to eventually implement shrinking, or am I left with
> the every so often heard marketing statement that I sure don't need it? 

Well, when it comes to working for a company which is supposed to be making
money, you cannot just go and implement features which will burn maybe
$75,000 to get going correctly (that includes dealing with support calls
etc from the customers who find bugs, fixing the bugs etc), unless there
is a return on the investment.

So I think the answer is no, we will not be doing it in the forseeable
future. But if some large customer was to wave several million in orders
at us with this as a requirement it might be a different matter.

Steve

> 
> (SCNR)
> 
> -- 
> Harald Milz           |     hm@linux-magazin.de     | "Our vision is to speed
> Linux Magazin         | phone  +49 (0) 89 993411-20 | up time, eventually
> Stefan-George-Ring 24 | fax    +49 (0) 89 993411-99 | eliminating it." --
> D-81929 Muenchen      | http://www.linux-magazin.de | Alex Schure
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
>